Category Archives: Ron Paul

NH primary January 10, 2012, Latest polls Romney 37 %, Paul Huntsman tied for second, Santorum Gingrich tied for third

NH primary January 10, 2012, Latest polls Romney 37 %, Paul Huntsman tied for second, Santorum Gingrich tied for third

Just in from CNN January 10, 2012.

“Polls: Tied up for 2nd and 3rd in NH”

“The final two polls here in the Granite State leading up to Tuesday’s first-in-the-nation primary both indicate Mitt Romney holding a 19 point lead over the rest of the field of candidates in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

And according to poll surveys, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas and former Utah governor and former U.S. ambassador to China Jon Huntsman are battling for second place, with former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in a dead heat for third place, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry in a distant sixth place.

According to the final Suffolk University/7 News tracking poll, released early Tuesday morning, Romney had the support of 37% of likely GOP primary voters in New Hampshire. Romney is very well known here in New Hampshire. He was governor of neighboring Massachusetts for four years last decade, and was often on Boston TV, which much of the heavily populated southern New Hampshire receives. Romney also owns a vacation home in the Granite State and has spent lots of time over the past six years in the state campaigning for himself or for fellow Republicans.

The tracking poll indicates Paul, who’s making his third bid for the White House, is at 18% and Huntsman, who skipped campaigning in Iowa (which held the first contest in the primary caucus calendar) to spend all of his time stumping in New Hampshire, is at 16%. Paul’s two point margin is well within the poll’s sampling error.

Perry, who left the Granite State following the back to back debates this weekend, is now campaigning in South Carolina, which holds its primary on January 21. He’s at one percent in the tracking poll. Seven percent were undecided.

An American Research Group poll released Monday night also indicates Romney grabs the support of 37% of likely GOP primary voters, with Huntsman at 18%, Paul at 17%, Santorum at 11%, Gingrich at 10% and Perry at one percent, with four percent undecided.
Both polls were conducted Sunday and Monday.

The ARG survey indicates Romney leading among registered Republicans, with 46%, followed by Paul at 15%, Huntsman at 13% and Gingrich and Santorum both at 10%. Huntsman and Romney are tied at 25% each among independent voters, with Paul at 20%, Santorum at 13% and Gingrich at 10%

The American Research Group poll questioned 600 likely primary voters in N.H. by telephone. The survey’s sampling error is plus or minus four percentage points. The Suffolk University tracking poll questioned 500 likely primary voters in N.H. by telephone.”

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/10/polls-tied-up-for-2nd-and-3rd-in-nh/

Ron Paul blames America for 9/11, GOP debate, Monday, September 12, 2011, Whose side is Paul on?, Left wing propaganda

Ron Paul blames America for 9/11, GOP debate, Monday, September 12, 2011, Whose side is Paul on?, Left wing propaganda

“With friends like the Saudis, who needs enemies?”

“You talk o’ better food for us, an’ schools, an’ fires, an’ all:
We’ll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don’t mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow’s Uniform is not the soldier-man’s disgrace.
   For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
   But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country” when the guns begin to shoot;
   An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
   An’ Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool — you bet that Tommy
sees!”…Rudyard Kipling, “Tommy”

“Militant Islam derives from Islam but is a misanthropic, misogynist, triumphalist, millenarian, anti-modern, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, terroristic, jihadistic, and suicidal version of it. Fortunately, it appeals to only about 10 percent to 15 percent of Muslims, meaning that a substantial majority would prefer a more moderate version.”…Daniel Pipes

If you want politically correct, go somewhere else.

The US defeated Nazi Germany and Japan and then helped rebuild the countries.
In 1990 Saudi Arabia asked for US troops to help stop the invasion of Kuwait and ultimately protect the Saudis.
The French, Germans and Russians were in bed with Saddam Hussein. I believe that the US invasion of Iraq could have been avoided if the United Nations had done it’s job.

I could have blasted Ron Paul in late 2008 when he stated that he would be laughed out of Congress if he challenged Obama’s eligibility. I did not let Mr. Constitution have it then. He was behaving like the rest of the sheep.

I agree with Glenn Beck, some of the statements made by Ron Paul make sense. However, Paul crossed over the line when he blamed America for 9/11. It was irresponsible and wrong!

Ron Paul mentioned the Saudis when he spoke of American Military Bases. His speech sounded more like left wing propaganda and employed selective references. Here are some facts regarding the Saudis.

From Daniel Pipes, winter of 2002/2003.

“DanielPipes.org looks at the Middle East, Islam, terrorism, U.S.
foreign policy, and related topics from the perspective of an American
with a Ph.D. in medieval Middle East history who now heads a
current-affairs think tank, the Middle East Forum.”
“The Scandal of U.S.-Saudi Relations”

 
“Consider two symbolic moments in the U.S.-Saudi relationship involving
a visit by one leader to the other’s country. In November 1990,
President George H.W. Bush went to the Persian Gulf region with his
wife and top congressional leaders at Thanksgiving time to visit the
400,000 troops gathered in Saudi Arabia, whom he sent there to protect
that country from an Iraqi invasion. When the Saudi authorities
learned that the President intended to say grace before a festive
Thanksgiving dinner, they remonstrated; Saudi Arabia knows only one
religion, they said, and that is Islam. Bush acceded, and he and his
entourage instead celebrated the holiday on the U.S.S. Durham, an
amphibious cargo ship sitting in international waters.

In April 2002, as Crown Prince Abdallah of Saudi Arabia, the country’s
effective ruler, was about to travel across Texas to visit President
George W. Bush, an advance group talked to the airport manager in Waco
(the airport serving the President’s ranch in Crawford) “and told him
they did not want any females on the ramp and also said there should
not be any females talking to the airplane.”[2] The Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) at Waco complied with this request and passed it
to three other FAA stations on the crown prince’s route, which also
complied. Then, when queried about this matter, both the FAA and the
State Department joined the Saudi foreign minister in flat-out denying
that there ever was a Saudi request for male-only controllers.

The import of these incidents is clear enough: Official Americans in
Saudi Arabia bend to Saudi customs, and official Americans in the
United States do so as well. And it’s not just a matter of travel
etiquette; one finds parallel American obsequiousness concerning such
issues as energy, security, religion and personal status. The Saudis
routinely set the terms of this bilateral relationship. For decades,
U.S. government agencies have engaged in a consistent pattern of
deference to Saudi wishes, making so many unwonted and unnecessary
concessions that one gets the impression that a switch has taken
place, with both sides forgetting which of them is the great power and
which the minor one. I shall first document this claim, then offer an
explanation for it, and conclude with a policy recommendation.”

“Starting in 1991, the U.S. military required its female personnel
based in Saudi Arabia to wear black, head-to-foot abayas. (This makes
Saudi Arabia the only country in the world where U.S. military
personnel are expected to wear a religiously-mandated garment.)
Further, the women had to ride in the back seat of vehicles and be
accompanied by a man when off base.”
“The pattern of Saudi fathers abducting children from the United States
to Saudi Arabia, and then keeping them there with the full agreement
of the Saudi authorities, affects at least 92 children of U.S. mothers
and Saudi fathers, perhaps many more. In each of these heartbreaking
cases, the State Department has behaved with weakness bordering on
sycophancy. To be specific, it has accepted the Saudi law that gives
the father near-absolute control over the movement and activities of
his children and wife (or wives). The department has made no real
efforts to signal its displeasure to the Saudi authorities over these
cases, much less made vigorous efforts to free the children held
against their American families’ wishes.”

“In Saudi Arabia, the U.S. government submits to restrictions on
Christian practices that it would find totally unacceptable anywhere
else in the world-starting with the U.S. president’s not celebrating
Thanksgiving in the Kingdom, as mentioned above. The hundreds of
thousands of American troops in Saudi Arabia in December 1990 were not
permitted to hold formal Christmas services at their bases on Saudi
soil; all that was allowed to them were “C-word morale services” held
in places where they would be invisible to the outside world, such as
tents and mess halls. The goal was for no Saudi to be made to suffer
the knowledge that Christians were at prayer.”

“With Jews, the issue is not freedom of religious practice in Saudi
Arabia; it is simply gaining entry to the Kingdom. In several
instances over many years, agencies of the U.S. government have
excluded Jewish Americans from positions in Saudi Arabia. Hunter
explains that a protocol prohibiting Jews being assigned to the
Kingdom was signed by the U.S. Embassy in Jeddah and the Saudi
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as a result of which the State Department
avoids sending Jewish employees to reside in Saudi Arabia.[11] Select
senior diplomats of Jewish origin may briefly visit the country on
official business but “no low or mid-level Jewish-American diplomat
was permitted to be stationed/reside in Kingdom” during Hunter’s
three-year experience.”

“Mail to U.S. military and official government personnel enters the
Kingdom on U.S. military craft, and American officials in Saudi Arabia
follow Saudi wishes by seizing and disposing of Christmas trees and
decorations and other symbols of the holiday. They seize and destroy
Christmas cards sent to (the mostly non-official) Americans who
receive their mail through a Saudi postal box, and even tear from the
envelope U.S. stamps portraying religious scenes.”

Read more:

http://www.danielpipes.org/995/the-scandal-of-us-saudi-relations

Congressman Paul Broun, Obama eligibility, US Constitution, Broun response, Broun Paul Boehner no more status quo

Congressman Paul Broun, Obama eligibility, US Constitution, Broun response, Broun Paul Boehner no more status quo

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

We have come to  expect anti American unconstitutional positions from the Democrats. The following actions and attitudes from Republicans are unacceptable.

When asked about challenging Obama’s eligibility during the certification of Electoral College votes in 2009.

“If I did that, I would be laughed out of Congress.”…Ron Paul, December 2008

The day of the reading of the US Constitution in the House of Representatives, Speaker Boehner allowed “citizen” to be used interchangeably with “natural born citizen.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner was interviewed by Brian Williams last friday after the reading of the US Constitution in the House Chambers and the shout of “Except Obama, except Obama” when the Natural Born Citizen clause was read. Williams continues the Orwellian tradition of the mainstream media of obfuscating the Obama eligibility issues by using citizen instead of Natural Born Citizen. Boehner, as Speaker of the House, should know better and should have corrected Williams. Otherwise, we have just another Pelosi look alike.

From The Post & Email February 2, 2011.

“I sent the following email to my U.S. congressman, Rep. Paul Broun:
Dear Rep. Broun,
I saw your interview following the SOTU with CBS.
I think it is imperative that just ONE elected Representative in D.C. stand up for the Constitution. I am PRAYING you are that hero. Barack claims that his father is Barack Sr., a British/Kenyan subject/citizen. It makes no difference where he was born, by our Constitution, he is not eligible as a dual citizen. He has admitted his dual citizenship on his own website, and in his own writings.”

“Rep. Broun’s response:
Thank you for recently contacting me with your kind remarks regarding the strong stances I have taken in Congress. Your words were very encouraging, and I am excited to hear that you are engaged in the political process.
In these tough times we must all work together to make America better for future generations. For my part, I will continue to fight for life, fiscal responsibility, and transparency in government. I hope that you will join this fight and encourage your friends and family to be as engaged as you are.”

Read more:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/02/constituent-to-u-s-congressman-be-a-hero/

The response from Congressman Paul Broun’s office appears to be a form letter, standard response. We need to contact Paul Broun and educate him. Once again, when you are discussing Obama’s eligibility issues with congressmen or those around you, keep it simple. While I agree that Obama is not a natural born citizen due to his father being British/Kenyan, it is subject to debate. Ask the non debatable question first.

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?

Next mention that the Governor of Hawaii, Neil Abercrombie, could find no birth certificate for Obama.

Then inform them that Tim Adams, who worked in a Hawaii elections office in 2008, has signed an affidavit stating that there was no birth certificate in Hawaii for Obama in 2008.

If they mention the COLB, inform them it is a document that refers to another document and is not proof of birth in Hawaii.

Keep it simple and non debatable.

Representative Ron Paul, Congressman Paul, Texas, Natural Born Citizen, Obama ineligible, US Constitution, Electoral College votes, Constitutional government, Voting record, Patriotism, Abuse of power, Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers??

No man can serve two masters.” (Matthew 6:24, KJV)

 Congressman Ron Paul of Texas never made it to the US Constitution
Hall of Shame. However, Congressman Paul is of interest to the
Citizen Wells blog for several reasons. Late in December of 2008,
I was informed that Ron Paul had been notified of the eligibility
issues surrounding Obama and that Mr. Paul was uncertain about
the natural born citizen clause pertaining to the presidency. I
was asked to research the natural born citizen clause. I did so
and found what anyone searching the internet can find. It is clear
what the intent of the founding fathers was. And yes, Vattel’s
“The Law of Nation’s” obviously influenced the Founding Fathers.

Citizen Wells report on Natural Born Citizen

Natural born citizen explained in video

There are several reasons why Obama is not eligible to be president.
However, most if not all congressmen were aware of numerous lawsuits
challenging Obama’s eligibility beginning with Philip Berg’s on
August 21, 2008. Many mistakenly stated that the lawsuits were
dismissed for lack of merit. That is patently false. However, since
the congressmen were aware of the lawsuits, they were also aware
that obama had employed an army of attorneys and spent enormous
amounts of resources to avoid proving that he was eligible.

That is the real smoking gun.

This is the reason that minimally, Congress should have demanded that
Obama prove that he was qualified. A single congressman could have
initiated this query before or when Congress convened to certify the
Electoral votes.

Not a single congressman stepped forward.

Congressman Ron Paul knew that there were serious issues surrounding
Obama’s eligibility. Congressman Ron Paul, who speaks of upholding
the US Constitution.

Late in December of 2008, Congressman Paul was asked if he would
challenge the Electoral votes in Congress. Here is his response:

“If I did that, I would be laughed out of Congress.”

I believe Congressman Paul’s response is typical of the position
of the entire Congress. However, Mr. Paul, we expected more from
you.

Consider the following

From Congressman Pauls’s link on the House of
Representives website

“Dr. Paul is the leading spokesman in Washington for limited
constitutional government,”

“Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure
is expressly authorized by the Constitution”

“Dr. Paul consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes,
spending, and regulation, and used his House seat to actively
promote the return of government to its proper constitutional levels.”
“He continues to advocate a dramatic reduction in the size of the
federal government and a return to constitutional principles.”
Read more here:

http://www.house.gov/paul/bio.shtml
“For Rep. Paul, each piece of legislation must be examined for its
constitutionality; that is, on the basis of whether or not the US
Constitution allows the Congress or the Federal Government to engage
in the actions described by the proposed legislation. If the
Constitution does not allow it, then it must be opposed.”

Read more here:

http://www.house.gov/paul/legis.shtml

 

From Ron Paul’s website:

“Congressman Paul’s consistent voting record prompted one of his
congressional colleagues to say, “Ron Paul personifies the Founding
Fathers’ ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his
principles will never be compromised, and they never are.” Another
colleague observed, “There are few people in public life who, through
thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul
is one of those few.””

Read more here:


http://www.ronpaul.org/
Near the end of the following video, Congressman Paul is
quoted as saying:


“The true patriot is motivated by a sense of responsibility
and out of self interest for himself, his family, and the
future of his country to resist government abuse of power.
He rejects the notion that patriotism means obedience to
the state.”

Congressman Ron Paul, I believe that you are a well meaning, decent
man. However, we deserve to know why you believed that Barack Obama
was eligible and why you did not at any time challenge Obama’s
eligibility. Is this the reason?

“If I did that, I would be laughed out of Congress.”

If so, remember:

No man can serve two masters.” (Matthew 6:24, KJV)

Congressman Ron Paul, you have a second chance. A chance to stand
for what you speak of. Contact us for dialogue.
Footnote:

Ron Paul will attend the first-ever Campaign for Liberty Regional
Conference On March 27-29.

“Campaign for Liberty members will gather at St. Louis’ Millennium
Hotel to network, learn, and build their local organizations as our
grassroots Revolution to reclaim our Republic and restore our
Constitution continues.”

Campaign for Liberty

Statement of Principles

“Americans inherit from our ancestors a glorious tradition of freedom
and resistance to oppression.  Our country has long been admired by
the rest of the world for her great example of liberty and prosperity—a
light shining in the darkness of tyranny.

But many Americans today are frustrated.  The political choices they
are offered give them no real choice at all.  For all their talk of
“change,” neither major political party as presently constituted
challenges the status quo in any serious way.  Neither treats the
Constitution with anything but contempt.  Neither offers any kind of
change in monetary policy.  Neither wants to make the reductions in
government that our crushing debt burden demands.  Neither talks about
bringing American troops home not just from Iraq but from around the
world.  Our country is going bankrupt, and none of these sensible
proposals are even on the table.

This destructive bipartisan consensus has suffocated American political
life for many years.  Anyone who tries to ask fundamental questions
instead of cosmetic ones is ridiculed or ignored.

That is why the Campaign for Liberty was established: to highlight the
neglected but common-sense principles we champion and reinsert them
into the American political conversation.

The U.S. Constitution is at the heart of what the Campaign for Liberty
stands for, since the very least we can demand of our government is
fidelity to its own governing document.  Claims that our Constitution
was meant to be a “living document” that judges may interpret as they
please are fraudulent, incompatible with republican government, and
without foundation in the constitutional text or the thinking of the
Framers.  Thomas Jefferson spoke of binding our rulers down from
mischief by the chains of the Constitution, and we are proud to follow
in his distinguished lineage.”

Read more here:

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

AmericaMustKnow.com not updating lawsuits, TheRightSideOfLife.com lawsuit list, Citizen Wells will help

The AmericaMustKnow website will not be providing updates. Here is a statement from the site:

“Sorry, I’m bowing out
As of 8:00 AM 12/4/08, I can no longer update this website due to the time demands it has imposed on me and my family.  I believe this is a worthy cause, and I hope that some person will carry the torch.  I’m getting over 2,500 new visitors a day now.  Thank you so much to those that have helped me.  Press on, it won’t be very long!”

http://americamustknow.com/default.aspx
TheRightSideOfLife website will be maintaining the list of lawsuits formally maintained by AmericaMustKnow.

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?page_id=1518

From AmericaMustKnow website, What can I do?

#1, Pray!
#2, Do Something!
Faith without works is DEAD!
 
 Sign Petitions

These are the two largest petitions so far:

Sign them both.  The Rally Congress web site will also send emails to members of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

 

 

 

Contact State and Federal Elected Representatives

Secretary of State and State Governors are usually involved in the validating of the votes of the electors.  They need to know people are concerned.

  1. 877-851-6437 (Congressional Switch Board)

     

 

Contact Electors

Contact your Electors that will cast their vote on December 15th.  Check this out.  Democratic-Disaster is heading up an organized means to contact them, but you should still strongly consider mailing a personal letter regarding your interests in the matter

 

 

 

 

Contact the Media

  1. Ask Fox Toledo to run a Follow up on the Berg case they covered on television on 10/13.
Contact Secretaries of State and Governors

 

URGENT!

Contact your United States Supreme Court Justices

 

Now is the time to act!

If you are seriously considering legal action in your state, I would contact Dr. Orly Taitz if I were you.  Several people have asked me and this is where I’ve pointed them.  She is in touch with several attorneys across the nation and there are several more cases in the works right now.  She’s very busy.  Don’t contact her unless you’re serious about doing something.  You can reach her on her blog at http://drorly.blogspot.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lightfoot v. Bowen, California lawsuit, Obama not eligible, Dr. Orly Taitz, Petition for Extraordinary Writ for Mandamus for Stay, Gail Lightfoot, Vice Presidential candidate, Ron Paul, co-Plaintiffs, Electors, Constitution Party, December 3, 2008

There is a new lawsuit before the California Supreme Court:

“Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Lightfoot v. Bowen: A new lawsuit
 
Today, December 3, 2008, Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq filed a second lawsuit in the Supreme Court of California; Lightfoot v. Bowen. This is a “Petition for Extraordinary Writ for Mandamus for Stay”.

Orly hopes that the California Supreme Court will either issue an emergency stay of the voting of the electors, or decline to hear the case because it is a federal issue. Either way, Orly hopes that the California Supreme Court will make this pronouncement in a timely manner.

Anyone who is concerned about this issue and wishes to express their concern to the court can do so:

Interested parties cab contact the California Supreme Court by phone

213 830 7570 Main court number in Los Angeles

415-865-7060 (Chief Justice Ronald M. George in San Francisco)

(415) 865-7000 Main court number in San Francisco

or by FAX

415 865 7183 Main FAX number in San Francisco

to express their concern that this complaint be looked at in a timely matter.”

Dr. Orly Taitz website:

http://drorly.blogspot.com/2008/12/lightfoot-v-bowen-new-lawsuit.html

Here is the core of the allegations:

lightfootbo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

View the entire Petition here:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1481